logo
‘Illegal' liquor pricing sparks outcry in Gurugram

‘Illegal' liquor pricing sparks outcry in Gurugram

Hindustan Times28-05-2025
The Gurugram excise department has launched an inquiry into allegations that liquor vends in the city are flouting pricing norms—by undercutting the minimum retail sale price (MRSP) for alcoholic beverages and overcharging bars and pubs well beyond permissible limits.
Officials said any violations of MRSP norms may indicate value-added tax (VAT) evasion and raise concerns about the sale of potentially substandard or unauthorised liquor in the market. Social activists and pub owners have also alleged the existence of a parallel, unregulated pricing system.
MRSP, under Haryana's excise policy, is the mandatory floor price for alcoholic beverages—below which no sales are allowed under any circumstances. Such sale not only distorts market competition but may also indicate that taxes are not being correctly levied or paid on transactions.
In many cases, the violation arises when outgoing L-2 license holders—retail vend operators—attempt to offload old stock by offering steep discounts as their tenure ends. With the new excise policy year beginning on June 12, some vendors are reportedly slashing prices to avoid incurring losses when handing over inventory to new licence holders.
Under the current excise policy, as well as the new policy effective from June 12, 2025 to March 31, 2027, L-2 licensees are barred from offering discounts below the MRSP. The policy also imposes a cap on how much more L-2 vends can charge bars and pubs—no more than 10% above the MRSP.
However,spot checks by HT indicate blatant violations. In one case, a 750 ml bottle of VAT 69 whisky, with an MRSP of ₹1,550, was reportedly being sold for ₹1,000—and in bulk purchases, for as little as ₹700. At the same time, some bars allege they are being charged ₹220 for a 330 ml bottle of Corona beer, which has an MRSP of ₹95—over double the allowed margin.
Supreme Court advocate Rajeev Yadav, who has been raising the issue with the excise department, said, 'The dual pricing strategy adopted by these vends is not only unethical but also illegal. Selling below MRSP suggests VAT evasion, while overcharging bars is profiteering. The excise department must initiate audits and take action.'
Pub and bar owners also voiced frustration over the unchecked practices. 'We're being charged nearly double for a single bottle of beer. The vendors tell us to take it or leave it. There's no enforcement,' said a pub manager from Sector 29, who asked to remain anonymous. Another bar owner from Cyber Hub echoed the sentiment, alleging that complaints to the excise department have gone unanswered. 'It feels like the system is compromised,' he said.
In response to the growing chorus of complaints, deputy excise and taxation commissioner (East) Amit Bhatia acknowledged the irregularities. 'We will check this activity and issue notices to the concerned L-2 licensees. Breach challans will be served, and further violations will attract stricter penalties,' he said.
But questions remain about how thoroughly these rules are being enforced. Many liquor vends reportedly fail to issue receipts with the name and address of the establishment, in violation of Clause 1.7 of the excise policy, which mandates the use of an integrated Point of Sale (POS) system. Moreover, the policy's cap on individual liquor purchases—no more than 12 bottles per customer—is being routinely flouted, say consumers.
The excise policy lays down strict penalties for MRSP violations. Clause 7.4 mandates the automatic suspension of the violator's licence for the day of detection and the following two days. Clause 2.13.5 allows for sealing of vends in cases of major violations. Despite this, vendors accused of undercutting prices and overcharging bars continue to operate.
Amit Khurana, a private sector employee, said the pricing disparities are obvious to regular buyers. 'It's a free-for-all. You find the same bottle at wildly different prices. We've complained, but nothing changes,' he said.
The practice not only disrupts fair market competition but also raises concerns about potential revenue loss for the state and questions about the quality and authenticity of discounted products. The Haryana Excise Policy for 2025-27 has introduced stricter penalties for violations, including significant fines and potential license cancellation for repeated offenses related to pricing and advertisement. However, the effectiveness of these measures is being questioned by the public given the ongoing nature of the problem.
Advocate Yadav emphasised the need for accountability, stating, 'It's imperative that the excise department not only penalises the erring vends but also investigates potential collusion within its ranks. The integrity of the system is at stake.'
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

U.S. Supreme Court clears way for Trump's plans to downsize federal workforce
U.S. Supreme Court clears way for Trump's plans to downsize federal workforce

The Hindu

timean hour ago

  • The Hindu

U.S. Supreme Court clears way for Trump's plans to downsize federal workforce

The Supreme Court on Tuesday (July 8, 2025) cleared the way for President Donald Trump's plans to downsize the federal workforce despite warnings that critical government services will be lost and hundreds of thousands of federal employees will be out of their jobs. The Justices overrode lower court orders that temporarily froze the cuts, which have been led by the Department of Government Efficiency. The Court said in an unsigned order that no specific cuts were in front of the justices, only an executive order issued by Mr. Trump and an administration directive for agencies to undertake job reductions. Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson was the only dissenting vote, accusing her colleagues of a 'demonstrated enthusiasm for greenlighting this President's legally dubious actions in an emergency posture.' Mr. Trump has repeatedly said voters gave him a mandate to remake the federal government, and he tapped billionaire ally Elon Musk to lead the charge through DOGE. Mr. Musk recently left his role. Downsizing of federal workforce Tens of thousands of federal workers have been fired, have left their jobs via deferred resignation programs or have been placed on leave. There is no official figure for the job cuts, but at least 75,000 federal employees took deferred resignation and thousands of probationary workers have already been let go. In May, U.S. District Judge Susan Illston found that Trump's administration needs congressional approval to make sizable reductions to the federal workforce. By a 2-1 vote, a panel of the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals refused to block Illston's order, finding that the downsizing could have broader effects, including on the nation's food-safety system and health care for veterans. Illston directed numerous federal agencies to halt acting on the President's workforce executive order signed in February and a subsequent memo issued by DOGE and the Office of Personnel Management. Illston was nominated by former Democratic President Bill Clinton. The labor unions and nonprofit groups that sued over the downsizing offered the justices several examples of what would happen if it were allowed to take effect, including cuts of 40% to 50% at several agencies. Among the agencies affected by the order are the departments of Agriculture, Energy, Labour, the Interior, State, the Treasury and Veterans Affairs. It also applies to the National Science Foundation, Small Business Association, Social Security Administration and Environmental Protection Agency.

Kanhaiya Lal murder accused plea in SC seeks direction to stay 'Udaipur Files' film release
Kanhaiya Lal murder accused plea in SC seeks direction to stay 'Udaipur Files' film release

New Indian Express

time2 hours ago

  • New Indian Express

Kanhaiya Lal murder accused plea in SC seeks direction to stay 'Udaipur Files' film release

NEW DELHI: Mohammed Javed, one of the accused in the 2022 murder of Udaipur-based tailor Kanhaiya Lal Teli, has filed a writ petition in the Supreme Court seeking a fair trial and stay on the release of the film The Udaipur Files: Kanhaiyalal Tailor Murder, scheduled to be released on 11 July 2025. Javed -- 8th accused in the murder case -- in his petition argued that the film is communally provocative and could prejudice ongoing judicial proceedings. "Releasing such a movie at this juncture, portraying the accused as guilty and the story as conclusively true, has the potential to seriously prejudice the ongoing proceedings," he stated in his plea. Javed sought direction to halt the release of the film which is said to be based on events pertaining to the case. He highlighted in his petition that if the film releases, it is likely to influence public opinion in a manner that could affect the fairness of the trial. He added that the film will likely compromise the presumption of innocence. "This directly impacts the right to a free and fair trial of the Petitioner, as guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India," said, Javed in his petition filed before the top court. Udaipur-based tailor Teli was brutally murdered in June 2022, allegedly by Mohammad Riyaz and Mohammad Ghous. The NIA investigated the case and a case listing offences under the UAPA and IPC was filed against the accused. The case trial is currently ongoing before the Special NIA Court, Jaipur.

After cops falter, Delhi man who killed woman over dog gets bail
After cops falter, Delhi man who killed woman over dog gets bail

Time of India

time3 hours ago

  • Time of India

After cops falter, Delhi man who killed woman over dog gets bail

Panaji: A Mapusa court has granted bail to a Delhi man, Deepan Batra, who allegedly ran over a Mandrem woman with his four-wheeler after a dispute about a dog. The court said police did not follow the procedure of serving him with his grounds of arrest. Batra's lawyer informed the court that Batra is a young man of 24 years, still a student, and coming from a reputed family with no criminal antecedents. He argued that Batra is experiencing incarceration as a victim of a media trial. Bail was sought on the sole ground that he was not served with the grounds of arrest according to the mandate of law and Article 22(1) of the Constitution. The investigating officer (IO) stated that Batra appeared at the police station along with his vehicle and parents. After being thoroughly interrogated, Batra allegedly confessed to the crime and was placed under arrest after being informed of the grounds of arrest. Intimation regarding his arrest was given to his father, and all Supreme Court guidelines were observed, the IO stated. Public prosecutor R Barreto told the court that the memo of arrest bears the signatures of the accused and his father. Therefore, Section 47 of the BNSS was duly complied with, and there's no question of bail for non-compliance. Additional Sessions Judge-2, Mapusa, Apurva R. Nagvenkar, however, held that the arrest memo 'does not contain various material details as required under the law, and therefore, it cannot be treated as communication of 'grounds of arrest' and therefore he's entitled to bail.' The sons of the victim, Maria Fernandes, told the court that they come from a poor family and were supported by their mother, who used to sell tender coconuts at a shop. Batra allegedly pushed one of Maria's sons, Joseph, and then assaulted Maria. Batra apparently became enraged after Joseph asked him not to bring his pet dog near their house. Subsequently, Batra allegedly drove his car at high speed into Maria, who was standing on the road. The impact knocked her down and she was dragged some distance. But Batra didn't stop his vehicle. Maria was declared brought dead at the Tuem health centre.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store